LBBABVOFCONGR^^; 



013 982 48''^ 



Hollinger 

pH8.5 

Mill Run F3-1955 



E 769 
.H26 
Copy 1 



SSr' } HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES j ^ NS^'mT 



Speech OF Notification 

By senator WARREN G. HARDING 



AND 



Speech of Acceptance 

By MR. CHARLES E. HUGHES 



I 
4 ■ ' 



I 



August 2, 1916. — Ordered to be printed 



WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1916 






D. of i). 
AUG 8 1916 



SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION 

AND 

SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 



SENATOR HARDING'S SPEECH. 

Senator Harding said: 

Mr. Hughes: The committee here assembled, representing all the 
United States and Territories, chosen by the Republican national 
convention, which met in Chicago on last June 7, is directed by 
that convention formally to notify you of its action in selecting you 
as its nominee for the Presidency of the Republic. 

Speaking for the committee, it is my pleasure to say directly what 
was conveyed to you by telegraph while the convention was yet in 
session — that you are the unanimous choice of the Republican 
national convention for the party standard bearer. 

That convention uttered the principles of a confident, determined, 
reunited, and enthusiastic Republican Party, which turns to you, 
in highest respect and trust, as a nominee best typifying the party's 
purposes and the people's desires. 

Inasmuch as the unusual circumstances inspired an informal notice 
at the time of the convention's action, and you then made an informal 
acceptance of the call to patriotic dut}" which won the plaudits of 
our people, I shall not refer in detail to the action of the convention 
or the declared principles to which the Republican Party is committed. 
But it is fitting that I should speak the congratulations of this com- 
mittee on your most extraordinary nomination. 

It has no parallel in the history of the Republican Party. As the 
whole i^eople have approvingly witnessed, you have been chosen for 
leadership by a convention which comprised the best thought, 
the highest intention, and deepest consecration of a great and his- 
toric party when you were not only not an aspirant but discouraged 
aU endeavors in your behalf. 

Notwithstandmg your holdmg aloof from all conference and par- 
ticipation, that unfailing understanding which directs po])ular 
sentiment to highest victory called you to the service of the party 
and the Nation. Your record of public service, your weU-known and 
courageous views on public questions when in executive position, 
your abiding devotion to Republicanism, your possession of a con- 
fidence which Iras united aU believers in Republican policies under 
our party banner, your unalterable and abidmg Americanism, your 
high personal character and well-known capacity — all these have 



4 SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 

fixed you in tlie American mind as the best exponent of Republican 
principles and the wisest leader to restore American prestige and 
efficient ooyernment. 

We bring you now the commission to that leadersliip. We bring 
it in full confidence that the people will gladly acclaim the Repub- 
lican restoration under your trusted leadership. We bring it in the 
highest appreciation of that peace of right and justice which your 
unwavering Americanism will hold secure rather than endanger. 
We bring it in the strong belief that American material good fortune, 
under Republican industrial preparedness, will be the glad reflex 
of our own ]3eace and the world's peace, and be held permanent 
under Republican protection. We bring it in firm conviction that 
you, sir, will hold that platform promises constitute a sacred party 
covenant, and the expressed will of the people at the polls must find 
response in capable and efficient administi'ation. 

Aye, sir, we bring it believing you will add to our self-respect, 
confidence, and good fortune at home and to that respect and good 
opinion abroad which meets our higher American aspirations. 



MR. HUGHES'S SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 

Senator Harding, members of the notification committee, and 
fellow citizens, this occasion is more than a mere ceremony of 
notification. We are not here to indulge in formal expressions. 
We come to state in a plain and direct manner our faith, our purpose, 
and our pledge. This representative gathering is a happy augury. 
It means the strength of reunion. It means that the party of Lincoln 
is restored, alert, effective. It means the unity of a common per- 
ception of paramount national needs. It means that we are neither 
deceived nor benumbed by abnormal conditions. 

We know that we are in a critical period, perhaps more critical 
than any period since the Civil War. We need a dominant sense of 
national unity; the exercise of our best constructive powers; the 
vigor and resourcefulness of a quickened America. We desire that 
the Repubhcan Party as a great hberal party shall be the agency of 
national achievement, the organ of the effective expression of domi- 
nant Americanism. What do I mean by that ? 

THE EXPRESSION OF AMERICANISM. 

I mean America conscious of power, awake to obligation, erect in 
self-respect, prepared for every emergency, devoted to the ideals 
of peace, instinct with the spirit of human brotherhood, safeguarding 
both individual opportunity and the pubUc interest, maintaining a 
well-ordered constitutionarsystem adapted to local self-government 
without the sacrifice of essential national authority, appreciating the 
necessity of stabihty, expert knowledge, and thorough organization 
as the indispensable conditions of security and progress; a country 
loved by its citizens with a patriotic fervor permitting no division 
in their allegiance and no rivals in their affection — I mean America 
first and America efficient. It is in this spirit that I respond to your 
summons. 

Our foreign relations have assumed grave importance in the last 
three years." The conduct of diplomatic intercourse is in the keeping 
of the Executive. It rests chiefly with him whether we shall show 
competence or incompetence; whether the national honor shall be 
mamtamed; whether our prestige and influence shall be lowered or 
advanced. What is the record of the admuiistratiou ? The first 
duty of the Executive was to command the respect of the world by 
the personnel of our State Department and our representation abroad. 
No party exigency could excuse the nonperformance of this obvious 
obligation. Still," after making every allowance for certain com- 
mendable appointments, it is apparent that this obligation was not 
performed. 



6 SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 

WEAKNESS AND INEXPERTXESS. 

At the very beginning of the present administration, where in the 
direction of diplomatic intercourse there should have been conspicu- 
ous strength and expertness, we had weakness and inexpertness. In- 
stead of assuring respect we invited distrust of our competence and 
speculation as to our capacity for firmness and decision, thus entailmg 
many difficulties which otherwise easily could have been escaped. 
Then, in numerous mstances, notably, in Latin America, where such 
a course was particularly reprehensible and where we desire to en- 
courage the most friendly relations, men of long diplomatic experience, 
whose knowledge and training were of especial value to the country, 
were retired from the service apparently for no other reason than to 
meet partisan demands in the appointment of inexperienced persons. 

Wliere, as in Santo Domingo, we had assumed an im])ortant special 
trust in the interest of its people, that trust was shockingly betrayed 
in order to satisfy "deserving Democrats." Tlie record showing the 
administration's disregard of its responsibilities with respect to our 
representation in diplomacy is an open book, and the specifications 
may easily be had. It is a record revealing professions belied. It 
is a dismal record to those believing in Americanism. Take, for 
example, the withdrawal of Ambassador Herrick from France. 
There he stood, in the midst of alarms, the very embodiment of 
courage, of poise, of executive capacity, universally trusted and be- 
loved. No diplomat ever won more completely the affections of a 
foreign people ; and there was no better f ort une for this country than 
to have at the capital of any one of the belligerent nations a repre- 
sentative thus esteemed. 

WHAT EEMOVING HERRICK MEANT. 

Yet tlie administration permitted itself to su])orsede him. The 
point is not that the man was Ambassador Herrick, or that the na- 
tion was France, but that we invited the attention of the world to 
the inexcusable yielding of national interest to partisan exj^ediency. 
It was a lamentable sacrifice of international repute. If we would 
have the esteem of foreign nations wo must deserve it. We must 
show oin* regard for special knowledge and experience. I propose 
that we shall make the agencies of our diplomatic intercourse in every 
nation worthy of the American name. 

The dealings of the administration with Mexico constitute a con- 
fused chapter of blunders. We have not helped Mexico. She lies 
prostrate, impoverished, famine-stricken, overwhelmed with the woes 
and outrages of internecine strife, the helpless victim of a condition of 
anarchy which the course of the administration only served to pro- 
mote. For ourselves, we have witnessed the murder of our citizens 
and the destruction of their ])roperty. We have made enemies, not 
friends. Instead of commanding respect and deserving good wiU by 
sincereity, firmness, and consistency^ we provoked misapprehension 
and deep resentment. 

In the light of the conduct of the administration no one could 
understand its professions. Decrying interference, we interfered 
most exasperatingly. We have not even kept out of actual conflict, 
and the soil of Mexico is stained with the blood of our soldiers. We 



SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 7 

have resorted to physical invasion, only to retire without gainiui^ the 
professed object. It is a record which can not be examined without 
a profound sense of humiliation. 

THE CASE OF HUERTA. 

When the administration came into power Huerta was exercising 
authority as provisional President of Mexico. He was certainly in 
fact tne head of the Government of Mexico. Whether or not he 
should be recognized was a c|uestion to be determined in the exercise 
of a sound discretion, but according to correct principles. The 
President was entitled to be assured that there was at least a de 
facto government; that international obligations would be performed; 
that the lives and property of American citizens would have proper 
protection. To attempt, however, to control the domestic concerns 
of Mexico was simply intervention, not less so because disclaimed. 

The height of folly was to have a vacillating and ineffective inter- 
vention, which could only evoke bitterness and contempt, which 
would fail to pacify the country and to assure peace and prosperity 
under a stable government. If crimes were committed, we do not 
palliate them. We make no defense of Huerta. But the admin- 
istration had nothing to do with the moral character of Huerta, if 
in fact he represented the Government of Mexico. We shall never 
worthily prosecute our unselfish aims or serve humanity by wrong- 
headediiess. So far as the character of Huerta is concerned, the 
hollowness of the pretensions on this score is revealed by the admin- 
istration's subsec|uent patronage of ViUa (whose qualifications as an 
assassin are indisputable), whom apparently the administration was 
ready to recognize had he achieved his end and fulfilled what then 
seemed to be its hope. 

JOHN LIND's mission. 

The question is not as to the nonrecognition of Huerta. The 
administration did not content itself with refusing to recognize 
Huerta, who was recognized by Great Britain, Germany, France, 
Russia, Spain, and Japan. The administration undertook to destroy 
Huerta, to control Mexican pohtics, even to deny Huerta the right 
to be a candidate for the office of President at the election the admin- 
istration demanded. With what be\vilderment must the Mexicans 
have regarded our assertion of their right to manage their own 
affairs. In the summer of 1913 John Lind was dispatched to the 
City of Mexico as the President's "personal spokesman and repre- 
sentative" to the unrecognized Huerta, in order to demand that 
the latter eliminate himself. It was an unjustifiable mission, most 
offensive to a sensitive people. John Lind hngered irritatingly. 
The administration continued to direct its efforts at the destruction 
of the only government Mexico had. 

In the spring of 1914 occurred the capture of Vera Cruz. Men from 
one of our sliips had been arrested at Tampico and had been chscharged 
with an apology. But our admiral demanded a salute, which was 
refused. Tliereupon tlie President went to Congress, asldng author- 
ity to use the armed forces of the United States. Without waiting 
for the passage of the resolution, Vera Cruz was seized. It appeared 



8 SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 

that a shipload of ammunition for Huerta was ahout to enter that 
port. Tliere was a natural opposition to this invasion, and a battle 
occurred in which 19 Americans and over 100 Mexicans were killed. 
This, of course, was war. Our dead soldiers were praised for dying 
like heroes in a war of service. Later we retired from Vera Cruz, 
giving up this nohle warfare. 

DID NOT GET THE SALUTE. 

We had not obtained the salute which was demanded. We had 
not obtained reparation for affronts. The ship with ammunition 
which could not land at Vera Cruz had soon landed at another ])ort, 
and its cargo was delivered to Huerta without interference. Recently 
the naked truth was admitted by a Cabinet officer. We are now 
informed that "we did not go to Vera Cruz to force Huerta to salute 
the flag." We are told that we went there "to show Mexico that we 
were in earnest in our demand that Huerta must go." That is, we 
seized Vera Cruz to depose Huerta. Tlie c|uestion of the salute was 
a mere pretext. 

Meanwhile, the administration utterly failed to perform its obvious 
duty to secure protection for the lives and property of our citizens. 
It is most unworthy to slur those who have investments in Mexico 
in order to escape a condemnation for the nonperformance of this 
duty. There can be no such escape, for we have no debate, and there 
can be no debate as to the existence of this duty on the part of our 
Government. Let me cjuote the words of the Democratic platform 
of 1912: 

The constitutional rights of American citizens should protect them on our borders, 
and go with them throughout the world, and every American citizen residing or 
having property in any foreign country is entitled to, and must be given, the full 
protection of the United States Government, both for himself and his property. 

The bitter hatred aroused by the course of the administration 
multiplied outrages, while our failure to afford ])rotection to our citi- 
zens evoked the scorn and contempt of Mexicans. Consider the 
ignominious incident at Tampico in connection with the capture of 
Vera Cruz. In the midst of the greatest danger to the hundreds of 
Americans congregated at Tampico our ships which were in the har- 
bor were withdrawn and om- citizens were saved only by the inter- 
vention of German officers, and were taken away by British and 
German ships. Tlie official excuse of the Secretary of the Navy is an 
extraordinary commentary. 

NAVAL commander's DILEMMA. 

Our ships, it seems, h-^d been ordered to Vera Cruz; but, as it 
appeared that they were not needed, the order was rescinded. Then, 
we are told, our admiral was faced with this remarkable dilemma : If 
he attempted to go up the river at Tampico and take our citizens on 
board, the word of "aggressive action," as the Secretary called it, 
"would have spread to the surrounding country" and it was "almost 
eertain that reprisals on xVmerican citizens would have followed and 
lives would have been lost." We had so incensed the Mexicans that 
we could not rescue our own citizens at Tamjnco save at the risk of 
the murder of others. We must take Vera Cruz to get Huerta out 



SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 9 

of ofRce and trust to other nations to get our own citizens out of peril. 
Wliat a travesty of international policy. 

Destroying the government of Huerta, we left Mexico to the rj'.vji.gcs 
of revolution. I shrll not attempt to narrate the sickening stories 
of the barbarities committed, of the carnival of murder and lust. 
We were then told that Mexico was entitled to spill as much blood 
as she pleased to settle her affairs. The administration vacillated 
with respect to the embargo on the export of arms ;uid munitions to 
Mexico. Under the resolution of 1012 President Taft had laid such 
an embargo. In August, 1913, President Wilson stated that he 
deemed it his duty to see that neither side to the struggle in Mexico 
should receive any assistance from this side of the border, and that 
the ex]]iort of all arms and munitions to Mexico would be forbidden. 

But in February, 1914, the embargo was lifted. In April, 1914, 
the embargo was restored. In May, 1914, it was explained that the 
embargo did not apply to American shipments through Mexican 
ports, and ammunition for Carranza was subsequently landed at 
Tampico. In September, 1914, the embargo was lifted on exports 
across the border; thereupon military supplies reached both YiUa 
and Carranza. In October, 1915, an embargo was declared on all 
exports of arms except to the' adherents of Carranza. There was an 
utter absence of consistent pohcy. 

CARRAXZa's RECOGNITION. 

For a time v, e bestowed friendship on Villa. Ultimately we recog- 
nized Carranza, not on the ground that he had a constitutioiial gov- 
ernment, but that it was a de facto government. The complete 
failure to secure j^rotection to American citizens is shown conclu- 
sively in the note of the wSecretary of State of June 20, 1916, in which 
he thus described the conditions that have obtained during the last 
three years: 

For three years the Mexican Republic has been torn with cIaII strife; the lives of 
Americans and other aliens have been sacrificed; vast properties developed by Amer- 
ican capital and enterprise have been destroyed or rendered nonproductive; bandits 
have been permitted to roam at will through the territory contiguous to the United 
States and to seize, without punishment or without effecti^-e attempt at punishment, 
the property of Americans, wliile the Ihes of citizens of the United States v\ ho ventured 
to remain in Mexican territory or to return there to protect their interests have been 
taken, in some cases barbarously taken, and the murderers have neither been appre- 
hended nor brought to justice. * * * It would be tedious to recount instance 
after instance, outrage after outrage, atrocity after atrocity, to illustrate the true na- 
ture and extent of the widespread conditions of lawlessness and violence which have 
prevailed . 

The Santa Ysabel massacre, the raid at Columbus, the bloodshed 
at Carrizal, are fresh in your minds. After the Columbus raid we 
started a "punitive expedition." We sent a thin line of troops hun- 
dreds of miles into Mexico, between two lines of railway neither of 
which we were allowed to use and which we did not feel at liberty to 
seize. We were refused permission to enter the tow^ns. Though 
thus restricted, the enterprise was still regarded by the Mexicans as 
a menace. Our troops faced hostile forces, and it is not remarkable 
that our men fell at Carrizal. What other result could be expected ? 



10 SPEECH OF XOTIFICATIOX AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 

THE PUEPOSE UNACCOMPLISriED. 

We were virtually ordered to withdraw, and without accomplishing- 
our purpose we have been withdrawing, and we are now endeavoring 
to safeguard our own territory. The entire National Guard has been 
ordered out, and many thousands of our citizens have been taken 
from their peaceful employment and hurried to the Mexican border. 
The administration was to seize and punish Villa for his outrage on 
our soil. It has not punished anyone; we went in only to retire. 
Future movements are apparently to be determined by a joint com- 
mission. 

The Nation has no policy of aggression toward Mexico. We have 
no desire for any part of her territory. We wish her to have peace, 
stability, and prosperity. We should be ready to aid her in binding 
up her wounds, in relieving her from starvation and distress, and in 
giving her in every practicable way the benefits of our disinterested 
friendship. The conduct of this administration has created diffi- 
culties which we shall have to surmount. We shall have to over- 
come the antipathy needlessly created by that conduct and to develop 
genuine respect and confidence. We shall have to adopt a new policy,, 
a policy of firmness and consistency, through which alone we can 
promote an enduring friendship. 

DEMANDS PROTECTION OF CITIZENS. 

We demand from ^lexico the protection of the lives and the prop- 
erty of our citizens and the security of our border from depredations. 
Much will be gained if Mexico is convinced that we contemplate no 
meddlesome interference with what does not concern us, but that 
we propose to insist in a firm and candid manner upon the perform- 
ance of international obligations. To a stable Government, appro- 
priately discharging its international duties, we shall give ungrudg- 
ing support. A short period of firm, consistent, and friendly (lealing 
will accomplish more than many years of vacillation. 

In this land of composite population, drawing its strength from 
every race, the national security demands that there shall be no 
paltering with American rights. The greater the danger of divisive 
influences, the greater is the necessity for the unifying force of a just, 
strong, and patriotic position. We countenance no covert policies, 
no intrigues, no secret schemes. We are unreservedly, devotedly, 
whole-heartedly for the United States. That is the rallying point 
for all Americans. That is my position. I stand for the unflinching 
maintenance of all American rights on land and sea. 

We have had a clear and definite mission as a great neutral nation. 
It was for us to maintain the integrity of international law; to vindi- 
cate our rights as neutrals; to protect the hves of our citizens, their 
property and trade from wrongful acts. Putting aside any c{uestion 
as to the highest possibilities of moral leadership in the maintenance 
and vindication of the law of nations in connection with the European 
war, at least we were entitled to the safeguarding of American rights. 
But this has not been secured. 



SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. U 

SERIES OF DIPLOMATIC NOTES. 

We have had brave words in a series of notes, but despite our pro- 
tests tiie lives of Americans have been destroyed. What does it avail 
to use some of the strongest words known to diplomacy if ambassa- 
dors can receive the impression that the words are not to be taken 
seriously? It is not words, but the strength and resolution behind 
the words, that count. 

The chief function of diplomacy is prevention; but in this our 
diplomacy failed, doubtless because of its impaired credit and the 
manifest lack of disposition to back words with, action. Had this 
Government, by the use of both informal and formal diplomatic 
opportunities, left no doubt that when we said "strict accountabil- 
ity" we meant precisely what we said, and that we shoidd imliesitat- 
ingly vindicate that position, I am confident that there would have 
been no destruction of American lives by the sinking of the Lusitania, 
There we had ample notice; in fact, pulalished notice. Furthermore, 
we knew the situation and we did not require specific notice. Instead 
of whittling away our formal statements by equivocal conversations, 
we needed the straight, direct, and decisive representations which 
every diplomat and foreign office would understand. I believe that 
in this way we should have been spared the repeated assaults on 
American lives. Moreover, a firm American policy would have been 
strongly supported by our people and the opportunities for the 
development of bitter feeling would have been vastly reduced. 

It is a great mistake to say that resoluteness in protecting American 
rights would have led to war. Rather, in that course lay the best 
assurance of peace. Weakness and indecision in the maintenance of 
known rights are always sources of grave danger; they forfeit respect 
and invite serious wrongs, which in turn create an uncontrollable 
popular resentment. That is not the path of national security. 

THE MAINTENANCE OF RIGHTS. 

Not only have we a host of resources short of war by which to en- 
force our just demands, but we shaU never promote our peace by 
bemg stronger in words than hi deeds. We sliould not have found it 
difficult to maintain peace, but we should have maintained peace 
with honor. During this critical period the only danger of war has 
lam in the weak course of the administration. 

I do not put life and property on the same footing, but the admin- 
istration has not only been remiss witli respect to the protection of 
American lives; it has been remiss with respect to the protection of 
American property and American commerce. It has been too much 
disposed to be content with leisurely discussion. I can not now 
undertake to review the course of events, but it is entirely clear that 
we failed to use the resources at our command to prevent injurious 
action, and that we suffered in consequence. We have no ulterior 
purposes, and the administration should have Imown how to secure 
the entire protection of every legitimate American interest and the 
prompt recognition of our just demands as a neutral nation. 

We denounce aU plots and conspiracies in the interest of any 
foreign nation. Utterly intolerable is the use of our soil for alien 
intrigues. Every American must unreservedly condemn them and 



12 SPEECH OF XOTIFICATIOiSr AXD SPEECIL OF ACCEPTANCE. 

support every effort for their suppression. But here also prompt, 
vigorous, and adequate measures on the part of the administration 
were needed. There should have been no hesitation, no notion that 
it was wise and politic to delay. Such an abuse of our territory de- 
manded immediate and thoroughgomg action. As soon as the 
admuiistration had notice of plots and conspiracies it was its duty 
to stop them. It was not lacking in resources. Its responsibility 
for their continuance can not be escaped l)y the condemnation of 
others. 

We are a peace-loving people, but we live in a world of arms. We 
have no thought of aggression, and we desire to pursue our democratic 
ideals without the wastes of strife. vSo devoted are we to these 
ideals, so intent upon our normal development, that I do not believe 
that there is the slightest danger of militarism in this country. Ade- 
quate preparedness is not militarism. It is the essential rissurance 
of security; it is a necessary safeguard of peace. 

SHOCKINGLY UNPREPARED. 

It is apparent that we are shockingl}" unprej^ared. There is no 
room for controversy on this point since the object lesson on the 
Mexican border. All our available regular troops (less, I believe, 
than 40,000) are there or in Mexico, and as these have been deemed 
insufhcient the entire National Guard has been ordered out: that is, 
we are summoning practically aU our movable military forces in order 
to prevent bandit incursions. In view of the warnings of the last 
three years, it is inexcusable that we should find ourselves in this 
plight. For our faithful guardsmen, who, with a fine patriotism, 
responded to this call and are bearing this burden, I have nothing 
but praise. But I think it little short of absurd that we should be 
compelled to call men from their sliops, their factories, their offices, 
and their professions for such a purpose. 

This, however, is not aU. The units of the National Guard were 
at peace strength, which was only about one-half the required 
strength. It was necessary to bring in recruits, for the most part 
raw and untrained. Only a small percentage of the regiments 
recruited up to war strength will have had even a year's training in 
the National Guard, which at the maximum means 100 hours of 
military drill, and, on the average, means much less. 

Take the Eastern Department as an illustration. The States in 
this department contain about 72 ])er cent of the entire Organized 
Militia of the country. I am informed by competent authority 
that the ([uota of militia from this department recently smnmoned 
with the units raised to war strength as required would amount to 
about lo 1,000 men; that in response to this call there are now en 
route to or on the border about 54,000 men, and in camp in their 
respective States about 28,000 men: and thus, after what has already 
been accomplished, there stiff remain to be supplied in recruits about 
48,000 men. 

UNTRAINED MEN CALLED OUT. 

Men fresh from their peaceful employments and physicaUy un- 
prepared liave been hurried to the border for actual service. They 
were witliout ))r()per e([uipment; without necessary supplies; suitable 



SPEECH OP XOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 13 

conditions of transportation wore not provided. Men with de])eiulent 
families were sent, and conditions which sliould have been well 
known were discovered after the event. And yet the exigency, 
comparatively speaking, was not a very grave one. It involved 
nothing tliat could not readily have been foreseen during the last 
three 3^ears of disturbance, and required only a modest talent for 
organization. That this administration wdiile pursuing its course in 
Mexico should have permitted such conditions to exist is ahnost 
incredible. 

In the demand for reasonable preparedness the administration has 
followed, not led. Those who demanded more adequate forces were 
first described as ''nervous and excited." Only about a year and a 
half ago we v.ere told that the question of preparedness was not a 
pressing one; that the country had been misinformed. Later, under 
the pressure of other leadership, this attitude was changed. The 
administration, it was said, had "learned something," and it made 
a belated demand for an increased Army. Even then the demand 
w^as not prosecuted consistently, and the pressure exerted on Con- 
gress with respect to other administrative measures was notably 
absent. The President addressed Congress but little over six months 
ago presenting the plans of the War Department, and Congress was 
formally urged to sanction these plans as "the essential first steps." 

They contemplated an increase of the standing force of the Regular 
Army from its then strength of 5,023 officers and 102,985 enlisted 
men to a strength of 7,136 officers and 134,707 enlisted men, or 
141,843 all told. It was said that these additions were "necessary 
to render the Army adequate for its present duties." Further, it 
was proposed that the Army should be supplemented by a force of 
400,000 disciplined citizens raised in increments of 133,000 a year 
through a period of three years. iVt least so much "by way of 
preparation for defense" seemed to the President to be "absolutely 
imperative now." He said: "We can not do less." 

ARMY ORGANIZATION BILL. 

But within two months this program was abandoned, and the able 
Secretary of War who had devoted himself persistently to this 
important question felt so keenly the change in policy that he 
resigned from the Cabinet. Now, the Ai-my organization bill provides 
for an army on paper of 178,000, but, in fact, it provides for only 
105,000 enlisted men for the line of the Regular Ai-my for the fiscal 
year ending June 30, 1917, and I am informed that for the next fiscal 
year there will be an increase of only 15,000. The plan for the 
supplemental Federal Army completely under Federal control was 
given up. 

We are told that the defects revealed by the present mobihzation 
are due to the "system." But it was precisely such plain defects 
that, under the constant warnings of recent years, with the whole 
world intent on military concerns, should have been studied and 
rectified. The administration has failed to discharge its responsi- 
biUties. Apparently, it is now seeking to meet political exigencies 
by its naval program; but it has imposed upon the country an 
incompetent naval administration. 



14 SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 

We (lomand adequate national defense, adequate proteetion on 
both our western and eastern coasts. We demand thoroughness and 
efficiency in both arms of the service. It seems to be phiin that our 
Regidar Arai}^ is too small. We are too great a country to require 
of our citizens who are engaged in peaceful vocation the sort of 
military service to which they are now called. As well insist that 
our citizens in this metropolis be summoned to put out fires and 
police the streets. We do not count it inconsistent with our liberties 
or with our democratic ideals to have an adequate police force. With 
a population of nearly 100,000,000 we need to be surer of ourselves 
than to become alarmed at the jirospect of having a Regular Arm}^ 
which can reasonably protect our border and perform such other 
military service as may be required in the absence of a grave emer- 
gency. I believe, further, that there should be not only a reason- 
able increase in the Regular Army, but that the first citizen reserve 
subject to call should be enlisted as a Federal army and trained under 
Federal authority. 

NATION WANTS MODERN METHODS. 

The country demands that our military and naval programs shall 
be carried out in a businesslike manner under the most compe- 
tent admmistrative heads; that we shall have an up-to-date prepa- 
ration; that the moneys appro]:)riated shall be ])ro]3erly expended. 
We should also have careful ])lans for mobilizing our industrial re- 
sources; for promoting research and utilizing the investigations of 
science. And a ])olicy of adef[uate pre])aredness must constantly 
have in view the necessity of conserving our fundamental human in- 
terests; of promoting the physical well-l:)eing of our population, as 
well as education and training; of developing to the utmost our 
economic strength and independence. 

It must be based upon a profound sense of our unity and demo- 
cratic obligation. It must not mean the abandonment of other 
essential governmental work, but that we shall have in both efficiency 
and in neither waste or extravagance. We should also be solicitous, 
l)y wise provision and conference, to remove so far as ])ossi])le the 
causes of irritation which may in any degree threaten frientlly rela- 
tions. In our proposals there is, I repeat, no militarism. There is 
simple insistence upon common sense in providuig reasonable meas- 
ures of security and avoiding the perils of neglect. We must have 
the strength of self-respect; a strength which contains no threat, but 
assures our defense, safeguards our rights, and conserves our peace. 

We are deeply interested in what I may term the organization of 
peace. We cherish no illusions. We know that the recurrence of 
war is not to be prevented by pious wishes. If the conflict of na- 
tional interests is not to be brought to the final test of force, there 
must be the develo])ment of international organization in order to 
provide mternational justice and to safeguard so far as practic;',ble 
the peace of the world. 

FAVORS A W(JRLD COURT. 

Arbitration treaties are useful within their proper sphere, but it is 
worse than folly to ignore the limitations of this remedy or to regard 
such treaties as an ade([u..te means of ])reventing war. There should 



SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 15 

be an international tribunal to decide controversies suscepti!)le of 
judicial determination, ' thus ati'ortling the advantage of judicial 
standards in the settlement of particular disputes and of the gradual 
growth of a body of judicial precedents. In emphasizing the de- 
sirability of such a tribunal for the dis])osition of controversies of a 
justiciable sort it must not be overlooked that there are also legisla- 
tive needs. 

We need conferences of the nations to formulate international 
rules, to establish principles, to modify and extend international law 
so as to adapt it to new conditions, to remove causes of international 
differences. We need to develop the instrumentalities of conciliation, 
and behind this international organization, if it is to be effective, must 
be the cooperation of the nations to prevent resort to hostilities before 
the appropriate agencies of peaceful settlement have been utilized. 
If the peace of the world is to be maintained, it must be through the 
preventive power of a common purpose. 

Without this it will still remain not only possible but practicable to 
disregard international obligations, to override the rights of States, 
particularly of small States, to ignore principles, to violate rules; and 
it is only through international cooperation giving a reasonable assur- 
ance of peace that we may hope for the limitation of armaments. It 
is to be expected that nations will continue to arm in defense of their 
respective interests, as they are conceived, and nothing will avail to 
diminish this burden save some practical guaranty of international 
order. We, in this country, can and should maintain our fortunate 
freedom from entanglements with interests and policies which do not 
concern us ; but there is no national isolation in the world of the 
twentieth century. 

OUR INTEKNATIONAL DUTY. 

If at the close of the prseent war the nations are ready to undertake 
practicable measures in the common interest in order to secure inter- 
national justice, we can not fail to recognize our international duty. 
The peace of the world is our interest as well as the interest of others, 
and in developing the necessary agencies for the prevention of war 
we shall be glad to have an appropriate share ; and our preparedness 
will have proper relation to this end as well as to our own immediate 
security. 

Wlien we contemplate industrial and commercial conditions we see 
that we are living in a fool's paradise. The temporary prosperity to 
which our opponents point has been created by the abnormal condi- 
tions incident to the war. With the end of the war there will be the 
new conditions determined by a new Europe. Millions of men in the 
trenches will then return to work. The energies of each of the now 
belligerent nations, highiy trained, will then be turned to production. 
These are days of terrible discipline for the nations at war, but it must 
not be forgotten that each is developing a national solidarity, a knowl- 
edge of method, a realization of capacity hitherto unapproached. In 
each the lessons of cooperation now being learned wiU never be for- 
gotten. Friction and waste have been reduced to a minimum ; labor 
and capital have a better understanding; business organization is 
more highiy developed and more intelligently directed than ever 



16 SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 

bofoiv. We see in each of these nations a marvelous national effi- 
ciency. T et it not be supposed that this efficiency will not count 
when" Europe, once more at peace, pushes its productive powers to the 
utmost liirit. 

On the other hand, in this country, with the stoppage of the manu- 
facture of munitions a host of men will be turned out of employment. 
We must meet the most severe competition in industry. We are 
imdisciplined, defective in organization, loosely knit, industrially 
unprepared. 

THE CONDITION OF LABOR. 

Our opponents promised to reduce the cost of living. This they 
have failed to do, but the}^ did reduce the opportunities of making a 
livhig. Let us not forget the conditions that existed in this country 
under the new tariff prior to the outbreak of the war. Production 
had decreased, business was lariguishing, new enterprises were not 
undertaken; instead of expansion there was curtailment, and our 
streets were filled with the unemplo3'ed. It was estimated that in 
the citv of New York over 300,000 were out of work. Throughout 
the country the jobless demanded relief. The labor commissioners of 
many States, and our municipal admin.istrations, devoted themselves 
to the problem of unemployment, while the resources of our voluntary 
charitable organizations were most severely taxed. What ground is 
there for expecting better conditions when the unhealthy stinudus of 
the war has spent its force and our industries and working men are 
exposed to the competition of an energized Europe ? 

It is plain that we must have protective upbuilding policies. It is 
idle to look for relief to the Democratic Party, which as late as 1912 
declared in its platform that it was "a fundamental principle of the 
Democratic Party that the Federal Government, under the Consti- 
tution, had no right or power to impose or collect tariff duties except 
for the purpose of revenue." We are told in its present platform that 
there have been "momentous changes" in the last two years, and 
hence, repudiating its former attitude, the Democratic Party now 
declares for a "nonpartisan tariff commission," But have the "mo- 
mentous changes" incident to the European war changed the Con- 
stitution of the United States ? Is it proposed to use a tariff commis- 
sion to frame a tariff for revenue only ? Is the opposing party ready 
to confess that for generations it has misread the Constitution ? Is 
that party now prepared to accept the protective principle? Rather, 
so far as the tariff is conceraed, it would appear to be without prin- 
ciple. Witness its action in connection with the sugar duties, its 
reaffirmation of the doctrine of a revenue tariff, its dyestuffs proposal, 
and its formulation in lieu of protective duties of an "antidumping" 
provision, the terms of which are sufficient to show its ineffective 
character. 

THE PROTECTIVE TARIFF. 

The iiepu])lican Party stands for the principle of protection. We 
must apply that principle fairly, without abuses, in as scientific a 
manner as ])ossible; and Congress should be aided by the investiga- 
tions of an expert body. We stand for the safeguarding of our eco- 
nomic independence, for the development of American industry, for 



SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 17 

the maintenance of American standards of living. We propose that 
in the competitive struggle that is about to come the American work- 
ingman shall not suffer. 

The Republican Party is not a sectional party. It thinks and 
plans nationally. Its policies are for the promotion of the prosperity 
of every part of the country — South, East, North and West. It is 
not simply a question of a wise adjustment of the tariff in accord- 
ance with sound principle, but there is also the need in other re- 
spects for stable conditions for commercial and industrial progress. 
If we are to meet effectively the conditions which will arise after the 
war is over, we must put our house in order. Let it be understood 
that the public right is to be maintained without fear or favor. But 
let us show that we can do this without impairing the essential 
agencies of progress. 

There is no forward movement, no endeavor to promote social 
justice which in the last analysis does not rest upon the condition 
that there shall be a stable basis for honest enterprise. This sub- 
ject has several important phases to which at this time I can allude 
only l:)riefiy. We should place our transportation system on a sure 
footing. We should be able wisely to adjust our regulative powers 
so that the fundamental object of protecting the public interest can 
be fully secured without uncertainties or conflicts and without ham- 
pering the development and expansion of transportation facilities. 
This national end may be accomplished without the sacrifice of any 
interest that is essentially local, or without weakening public con- 
trol. Our present system is crude and inadequate. 

COMMERCE, INDUSTRY, SHIPPING. 

Moreover, m the severe economic struggle that is before us, and in 
seeking, as we should, to promote our productive industries and to 
expand our commerce — notably our foreign commerce — we shall 
require the most efficient organization quite as efficient as that found 
in any nation abroad. There must be no unnecessary wastes and no 
arbitrary obstructions. We have detemiined to cut out, root and 
branch, monopolistic practices, but we can do this without hobbling 
enterprise or narrowmg the scope of legitimate achievement. Again, 
we must build up our merchant marine. It will not aid to put the 
Government into competition with private owners. That, it seems 
to me, is a counsel of folly. A surer way of destroying the promise of 
our foreign trade could hardly be devised. It has well been asked: 
Does the Government mtend to operate at a porfit or at a loss ? We 
need the encouragement and protection of Government for our ship- 
pmg mdustry, but it can not afford to have the Government as a 
competitor. 

We stand for the conservation of the just interests of labor. We 
do not desire production, or trade, or efficiency in either for its own 
sake, but for the bettennent of the Uves of human bemgs. We shaU 
not have any lasting mdustrial prosperity unless we buttress our 
industrial endeavors by adequate means for the protection of health; 
for the elimination of unnecessary perils to life and limb; for the 
safeguardmg of our future through proper laws for protection of 
women and children m mdustiy; for increasing opportunities for 

H. Doc. 1315, 64-1 2 



18 SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 

education and training. We should be solicit ious to inquire carefully 
into every grievance, remembering that there are few disputes which 
can not easily be adjusted if there be an impartial exammation of 
the facts. We make common cause m this country, not for a few, 
but for all; and our watchword must be cooperation,^not exploitation. 
No plans will be adequate save as they are mstinct with genuine 
d emo era tic sy mp a thy . 

FEDERAL COMPENSATION LAW. 

I stand for adequate Federal workmen's compensation laws, deal- 
ing not only with the employees of Government, but with those 
employees who are engaged in interstate commerce and are subject 
to the hazard of injury, so that those activities which are within the 
sphere of the constitutional authority of Congress may be dealt with 
under a suitable law. 

We propose to promote by every practicable means our agricul- 
tural interests, and we include in the program an effective system of 
rural credits. We favor the wise conservation of our natural re- 
sources. We desire not only that they shall be safeguarded, but that 
they shall be adequately developed and used to the utmost public 
advantage. 

We turn to other considerations of important policy. One of these 
is our attitude toward the Phihppines. Tliat, I may say, is not a 
question of self-interest. We have assumed international obhga- 
tions which we should not permit ourselves to evade. A breach" of 
trust is not an admissible American policy, though our opponents 
have seemed to consider it such. We should administer government 
in the Philippines with a full recognition of our international duty, 
without partisanship, with the aim of maintaining the highest stand- 
ards of expert administration, and in the interest of the Filipinos. 
This is a matter of national honor. 

FAVORS VOTES FOR WOMEN. 

I indorse the declaration of the platform in favor of woman suf- 
frage. I do not consider it necessary to review the arguments usually 
advanced on the one side or the other, as my own convictions pro- 
ceed from a somewhat different point of view. Some time ago a 
consideration of our economic conditions and tendencies, of the posi- 
tion of women in gainful occupations, of the nature and course of 
the demand, led me to the conchision that the granting of suffrage to 
women is inevitable. Opposition may delay, but in my judgment 
can not defeat, this movement. Nor can I see any advantages in 
the delay which can possibly offset the disadvantages which are nec- 
essarily incident to the continued agitation. Facts should be squarely 
met. We shall have a constantly intensified effort and a distinctly 
feminist movement constantly perfecting its organization, to the sub- 
version of normal political issues. We shall have a struggle increas- 
ing in bitterness, which I believe to be inimical to our welfare. If 
women are to have the vote, as I believe they are, it seems to me 
entirely clear that in the interest of the public life of this country 
the contest should be encUnl promptly. I favor the vote for women. 



SPEECH OF NOTIFICATION AND SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE. 19 

Confronting every effort to improve conditions is the menace of 
incompetent administration. It is an extraordinary notion that 
democracy can be faithfully served by inexpertness. Democracy 
needs exact knowledge, special skill, and thorough training in its 
servants. I have already spoken of the disregard of proper standards 
in numerous instances in appointments to the diplomatic service. 
Unfortunately there has been a similar disregard of executive respon- 
sibility in appointments to important administrative positions hi our 
domestic service. Even with respect to technical bureaus the de- 
mands of science have been compelled to yield to tli^ demands of 
politics. 

THE CIVIL-SERVICE LAWS. 

We have erected against importunities of spoilsmen the barriers of 
the civil-service laws, but under the present administration enact- 
ments providing for the creation of large numbers of places have been 
deliberately removed from the merit system. The principles of our 
civil-service laws have been shamelessly violated. We stand for 
fidelity to these principles and their consistent application. And, 
further, it is our purpose that administrative chiefs shall be men of 
special competence eminentl}^ qualified for their important work. 

Our opponents promised economy, but they have shown a reek- 
ess extravagance. They have been wasteful and profligate. It is 
time that we had fiscal reform. We demand a simple, businesslike 
budget. I believe it is only through a responsible budget, proposed 
by the Executive, that we shall avoid financial waste and secure 
proper administrative efficiency and a well-balanced consideration of 
new administrative proposals. 

We live in a fateful hour. In a true sense the contest for the preser- 
vation of the Nation is never ended. We must still be imbued with 
the spirit of heroic sacrifices which gave us our country and brought 
us safely through the days of civil war. We renew our pledge to the 
ancient ideals of individual liberty, of opportunity denied to none 
because of race or creed, of unswerving loyalty. W^e have a vision 
of America prepared and secure; strong and just; equal to her tasks; 
an exemplar of the capacity and efficiency of a free people. 

I indorse the platform adopted by the convention and accept its 
nomination. 

o 



LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



0T3 982 487""8""^ ^ 



'<*. 



^.^ 



■5|i| 



LIBRARV OF 



CONGRESS 



013 982 487 8 



Hollinger 

pH8.5 

Mill Run F3-1955 



HBRARV OF 



CONGBESS 



013 982 487 



HoUinger 

pH8.5 

Mill Run F3-1 955 



y\ 



